The Nationalist Voice

Month: September 2015

Taxes, we hate them, they are annoying, they are riddled with so much garbage the tax code now has over 74,600 pages of rules. No accountant can possibly know them all. Few individuals can correctly do their own tax return. We buy software… we hire H&R Block, or we hire high end accountants. The end result, we pay money to the IRS, money to an accountant, and money for Social Security and Medicare.

And then there are those who don’t – pay money that is, and therein lies the true fraud within the system.

While politicians banter about changing the tax rates, having ‘fewer tax rates’, and cutting corporate tax rates, the biggest tax losses were addressed by Trump – overseas accounts, international deferment of taxes, and the carried interest break for fund managers. Bada-Boom!

It’s well known at the corporate level who plays and who pays. A board game of engineering feats, it can be as simple as setting up a local office in a country that has little to no tax, such as; Morocco, Bermuda, Ireland, and even the UK and Canada have joined the pool. Some argue that the ‘effective rate’ in the US is lower because of deductions, but this isn’t the entire story. I remember the story (before online filing) of a corporation filling three UPS trucks with it’s tax return. Many corporations hire a team of accountants just to prepare their tax returns which can take years to do.

Between 2011 and 2014 22 companies left the US for a brighter tax future, including Burger King, Eaton PLC, Perrigo, Elan, and Vantage Energy, joining the 25 other companies that had already exited in the last decade. Of 34 countries in the OECD, the US ranks number one highest in corporate tax rates. The argument that the US effective rate is less seems to be lost on the hundreds of corporations that have exited. Insurance companies notoriously have run to Bermuda in the last decade as have a number of their highest paid executives.

How much revenue is lost? Well it depends on who is doing the counting because the figures range from about $40 billion to $150 billion. It’s an accounting thing… Currently, individual income taxes comprise 37% of the total revenue collected by the government, corporate taxes only 9%. Total federal revenue for 2015 is estimated to be $3.18 trillion. Corporate revenue generated would then be about $286 billion and individual revenue would be $1.176 trillion. If lost revenue to ex-patriot corporations brought in additional sums of $150 billion, this would increase the bankroll by 52%. But is that enough?

Trump would offset the revenue by imposing a one time 10% penalty on all cash held overseas, estimated to be $2.1 trillion. That would amount to an additional $210 billion. But how much would be lost in individual revenue? Not an easy answer. You see, modifying deductions and lowering gaps will encourage ex-patriot individuals back to US shores which could easily offset any reductions of revenue by the little guys. It really is a win-win situation that would have imploding positive effects on the US economy.

The Economic Policy Institute argues that lowering taxes is all poppy-cock, a worthless endeavor that will do absolutely nothing but cost America healthcare and education. Who is the EPI? A very leftist organization supported by labor unions and ta-da – George Soros. No agenda there.

Seems to me, at 74,600 pages, it would be a lot easier to scrap the entire code and start over – fresh, with one covenant, you have to make the entire individual code fit in five pages, and the corporate code fit in seven pages. KISS. Of course, there will be naysayers, perhaps the 1000+ tax team at GE that effectively reduced GE’s taxes to – zero!

What we do know is that doing nothing but expanding the already belligerent tax code will create a ruinous environment as more and more individuals and companies continue their exodus. And right now, Trump’s tax plan would seem to address the larger picture better than Rubio and Bush, and certainly puts Hillary to shame.

Hillary’s 2014 tax return showed deductions for travel (her famous hallmark) at roughly $1.5 million. And on gross income of over $30 million, charitable donations were a paltry $22,700 – not including self donations to their Foundation of Grease – $3 million. And we know that this $3 million personal deduction was spent for more travel. In 2013, travel expenses were an exorbitant $2,220,000, foreign source income (from India) excluded was $7.5 million, $38,000 went to charity and again $3 million to their self Foundation.

In addition, upwards of $26 million in revenue was diverted to the Clinton Foundation and not included in their personal income tax return – and thus non-taxable. And despite the fact that they list themselves as a $3 million annual donor to their corporation on their personal return, they don’t show up on the Foundation Donor list. Huh?

So yes, our tax system is ripe with flaws. And yes, we need a major overhaul and have for years! And yes, addressing the entire corruption means pushing back against some surly allowances and will make some powerful people quite unhappy. Because, the kicker is not about fudging the tax brackets, that’s just pushing papers around a desk, the kicker is getting back the income, both corporate and individual, that could be taxed here and the only candidate addressing this – Trump.

“Wanted: no previous experience required. Must be able to lift heavy sword. Must not fear blood and death. Good pay and health benefits. Hours of employment – flexible. May be asked to perform additional duties, such as amputations and torture. No recruiters please, only serious Male candidates should apply.”

United Nations:

“Wanted: Human Rights Advocate. Must uphold the greatest value of human rights and human dignity, unless torture and public executions are deemed necessary for The Greater Good, in which case, go for it. but make sure not to get any of that blood on my Armani suit. And as for women and children, we adamantly agree that they are inferior, so whatever suppression you deem appropriate we uphold and will never challenge. Indiscriminate civilian bombing is okay too as long as you make sure to call it ‘coalition’ bombing in the name of terrorism. Okay then, that about sums it up… oh and must rank among the lowest in the world for social and economic freedom.”

Saudi, NATO, US solution:Bomb everyone, eradicate the entire population and instill puppet government– end of problem.

Oh wait… al Qaeda… no matter.

Like Syria… no matter.

So when did the UN become an ineffective corrupt institution? After being roiled in abuses and corruption for decades, most recently the oil for food scandal in Baghdad kickbacks, the UN set up a self regulating anti-corruption task force in 2006. After just two years, they declared everything was hunky-dory and disbanded in 2008. Who decided that? Why the UN General Assembly did. You see, the UN is given complete authority to hide everything from financial opacity to internal department opacity, to censorship. Their power is absolute.

UN Peacekeepers were charged with rape, sexual abuse, gun running, and abuse. But what has been done since the allegations? Well, the head of the Peacekeeping agency was sacked… and that’s it. Will the abuse stop? No! It’s been an issue for decades – decades! And the UN is the perpetrator. The same UN using $25 billion to end preventable deaths, the same UN spending billions on Human Rights, the same UN that is required to provide NO financial accountability. The same UN that elects Saudi Arabia as one of their ambassadors for Human Rights.

The issue with the UN stems from issues with its leadership, past and present, specifically Ban Ki Moon. Former representatives, employees and delegates, have expressed concerns over internal favoritism, of control over internal audits and investigations, over corruption charges, over refusal to hand over court ordered documents and over the constant deference to ‘immunity’ despite heinous abuses and crime.

While Ban Ki Moon is considered a gentle person, a man content to be in the shadows, a man humble and courteous, these are qualities of a monk, not a world leader. And so goes the UN having accomplished little to nothing with no oversight and a chaotic over-growth of governmental quackery.

The rule and law within the agency has been described by former under-secretary, Inga-Britt Alhenius, as deplorable and seriously embarrassing, an agency drifting into irrelevance.

Bringing Saudi Arabia into the Human Rights council is wholly a political move that further discredits the entire value structure and reputation of the UN. It is truly beyond any moral, ethical or value system in our careening spiral into complete depravity.

So how much does the US ante up to this organization?

No one is exactly sure… You see, while the US is on the hook for roughly 25% of the budget, no one wants to advertise what that budget actually is because, well, then they’d have to actually tell us how it is spent.

Apparently, there are two budgets, a core and a system budget. As of 2011, some estimated the system budget at $25 billion which would put the US obligation at roughly $6 billion. But there are no numbers for the ‘core budget’. Even Susan Rice of the US State Department refused to provide any answer when asked about the UN Budget numbers. Stonewalled, we can ante up our tax dollars indiscriminately, or we can ask for accountability.

If the US ante’s up six, ten, fifteen billion annually, and if Saudi Arabia votes against the US in typical referendums over 70% of the time, and the US continues to give foreign aid to Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia continues to mutilate it’s citizens, persecute its women and crucify its children – what the HECK ARE WE DOING?

The VW scandal has a bigger agenda. And the orchestrator’s are an interesting batch that seem to lead to – Soros and Climate Change.

The EPA broke the scandal after an ‘independent research group’ brought it to their attention…

Enter: ICCT, International Council on Clean Transportation. Its major partners include the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Climateworks, and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. The Packard Foundation has funded many of the same organizations as Soros Open Society, advocating heavily for abortion rights, and EPA initiatives.

Two of the Board members of ICCT are executives at Climateworks. One of Climateworks board members, John Podesta, is from the Center For American Progress, a die hard Soros funded, organized and operated organization. Another board member, Larry Kramer is from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation – working in conjunction with the Open Society (Soros). A third is Kristian Parker of the Oak Foundation which also partners with Soros Open Society.

Margo Oge, former Director of the EPA, currently on the board of ICCT, and a strong emission control proponent, cites Arcade Press (now Skyhorse publishing) as a current employer. They published her book, along with Soros book about how his father outwit the Gestapo. She also states her membership/alliance with ‘Union of Concerned Scientists’, another Open Society partnership.

And headlines today are stating that even Germany’s Merkel is implicated in the VW scadal, having known of the sham for some time. Who funded the headlines? Germany’s Green Party. George Soros is closely aligned with the German Green Party, a social democrat organization that openly vilifies Russia and is actively pursuing ousting Merkel.

How best to do this than to create propaganda that will lay a heavy hand on Merkel’s reputation and damage the country’s economy – purportedly at her hand.

But it gets even sweeter. In January of this year, representatives of Soros who were at the National Automobile Dealers Association convention stated that Soros wanted to buy dealerships. But there were no sellers, the stiff market may have just been unstiffed with VW stock plummeting, scandal, and a resigning CEO. In March of this year the share price stood at $252, it has now plunged to $119, losing over 50% of its value. Did Soros not only short VW, but sit around and wait for the catastrophic plunge in order to make a dealership offer?

A Mangled Web of Chaos!

The tanking of VW which includes Audi and Porsche will also hurt Germany’s economy. The EPA has stated that their fines could amount to $18 billion – which would go into the Obama coffers. In addition, class action lawsuit attorneys are already rubbing their hands together calculating their 33% equity gain with visions of Lamborghini’s and Greek Isles. A quote about the future of VW states: “They need a new start, and the new start can only be made with new … personnel and management.”

Maybe ownership will be on the table as well as Soros sits and waits for the bottom to stable out just in time for him to – buy, buy buy!

It wasn’t really about the actual deal, it was about opening a new business market. Flocking to Tehran, EU businesses have already cut deals, secured contracts and readied for the blitz while US counterparts hedged their bets waiting for Congress to aye or nay the deal.

A baby’s bottom, the Iran deal is a business bonanza! Iran opens the door to $$$$, and in a stagnant economy, any new market poses the possibility of generating beaucoup profits. The lobbyists could care less about the hostages, the prisoners, the ethics or even the risks, because that’s their game – shoot the moon.

Before the sanctions, France, Germany and the UK were Iran’s biggest trading partners, and by golly, they aim to be again! The French have already lined up a delegation of over 100 firms including automakers, plane makers, oil companies, agriculture companies, banking, pharmaceuticals and construction firms. Italy has already set up a memorandum of understanding for business dealings.

The EU wanted the Iran deal, and by any means possible, they were going to force the hand of the US. It was never about the terms, it was about just getting a deal signed so that businesses could reopen and the flow of money could be reinstated. Only two countries opposed the deal – Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia doesn’t want an economically strong Iran, they want a weak neighbor, one that they can destroy, one that has no power. Had Iran the strength, the Saudi’s would never have been able to annihilate Yemen. Instead of a ‘coalition’, it would have amounted to an aggressive war. A distinction that is ridiculously waived by the EU and the US as the Saudi’s continue to bomb civilians daily. Yemen was closely aligned with Iran. Giving Iran more power could easily disrupt the power plays that riddle the Middle East.

Israel. While Netanyahu lobbied for a more transparent deal, as in don’t have the wolf guard the chicken coop, it was a lost cause. Iran is not a negotiating country and President Rouhani made it quite clear that this is the deal, take it or leave it. But for Israel, it is not just about nuclear, it is about the influx of billions of dollars of revenue and how that will be used to bolster Iran’s military as well. It’s about a country that has adamantly proclaimed its desire to destroy Israel and the stress that threat invokes. Changing the balance, Iran will most likely use it’s new found cash flow to bolster Hamas and Hezbollah, further putting Israel at risk. It is incredibly short sighted to simply focus on nuclear energy when the entire economic balance will change, albeit not too rapidly, but certainly within the next decade.

There were some opposition forces that wanted the US to drop a partial list of sanctions, but the EU had already readied to drop theirs entirely, which would create an imbalance of trade for US businesses and further alienate the US economically. In addition, the mud effect this would have on multi-international businesses could prove a legal nightmare bordering catastrophic.

So while pundants are busily talking about how Iran will use smoke screens and magic tricks to hide nuclear advancement, no one cares, because when weighing business vs security, security looses every time. And once businesses start back up in Iran, the cost of imposing sanctions again at some later date will be met with fire and brimstone.

Of course, from a White House position, this is just another tick mark for the history books lauding President Obama and giving him a written legacy from which he can gain one giant ego in the name of mankind.

Ben Carson has suggested that, in his opinion, a Muslim who’s faith is Islam should not be qualified to be President of the US. The media ridicules him for his statement.

Trump is chastised roundly for not ‘defending Obama’ when a question is posed and the man refers to Obama as a Muslim.

CAIR, calls on Ben Carson to – quit.

Hillary takes jab at GOP’s.

Clinton says Trump fueling paranoia with his Muslim views.

And it’s only just begun.

CAIR claims it is the spokesperson of all US Muslims. But the percentage of Muslims in the US is less than 1%, around .8% of the total population. Not terribly noteworthy in terms of total force and hardly a force that can demand Carson to quit. Muslims have historically voted for Democrats, 72% voted for Obama while their voter turnout has been approximately 2/3 of their population – 1,700,000.

Add to the flames that CAIR has a relatively savory reputation for belonging to and or assisting terrorists, they certainly are not a great spokesperson for the religion. CAIR has been linked to Hamas. Created by The Muslim Brotherhood, an organization decreed a terrorist organization by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and by the United Arab Emirates, they are not exactly squeaky clean.

So why do we listen to them? Why are they given media attention at all with regard to Ben Carson?

CAIR boasts a membership of …5,000. Again, hardly noteworthy. But the media would have their panties in a wad because Ben Carson made what they term as an Islamophobic statement. Really? I’d say he made a judgment call on a topic that indicts terrorists and prohibits them from governing the US. Personally, I’m not a fan of Shari’a.

So why all the fuss?

Well, it would appear that the ‘fuss’ is relegated to the media, and does not seem to be the voice of the people. But then the government and the media ceased being the voice of the people years ago. Instead, they became the voice that wants to defraud the people. Hillary thought using the point would elevate her status, as did Sanders when they decried foul!

Who does CAIR like? Hillary, Rubio and Christie. Who does CAIR dislike? Basically anyone even remotely associated with David Horowitz Freedom Center. According to The Southern Poverty Law Center, a group funded by George Soros, David Horowitz is “the godfather of the anti-Muslim movement”. This indirectly connects Soros and CAIR as having the same ideals and principles.

David Horowitz has a fascinating background. His parents embraced communism and Stalin, and raised him in a world fed heavy doses of propaganda and censorship. It wasn’t until 1956 that his parents read Nikita Kruschevs Secret Speech and felt deeply betrayed, subsequently renouncing their stance. David was a devout Marxist advocating his far left political views in the UK and later in the US. A proponent of The Black Panther Party, but moved away from this when confronted with the murder of Betty Van Patter, a good friend whose body was found floating in the San Francisco Bay. The Black Panthers were suspect. Sometime in 1985, David formerly voiced his shift in loyalties in his support to then Republican, Ronald Reagan.

A prolific writer, in advocating for a conservative view, Horowitz claimed our universities were being redefined to a political correctness that had one leaning and one leaning only – left. He exposed 101 professors that he feels are dangerous in their ideals and socialist views in a book entitled, The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America. And despite a special investigation led by The House of Representatives in 2006 which found that students were not unfairly targeted if their views did not conform to leftist thinking, with the rise of social media, we have seen that is not true time and again.

Two of my sons were witness/victim of these politically correct agenda’s while on campus. Within the college community, it is well known, and routine.

Having turned his sights on Islam, Horowitz wrote of the ‘unholy alliance’, and became a target of CAIR. The book was a bestseller and sold millions of copies. He has been on numerous speaking engagements within various universities and each time shows the explicit anti-Jewish view of the Muslim students, their embrace of Hamas, and their inability to debate with any merit.

Falling into Alice in Wonderland’s Rabbit Hole, the debate became a reality show for Hollywood:

Uggh – the debates. So many candidates leaves little time for individual shine. Full disclosure, I didn’t want to watch but my husband asked and I relented … for a while.

From the horse’s gate, the style was one that I abhor. The topics were entertainment style, tabloid, petty insults, personal insults, derogatory rhetoric and within minutes I wanted to turn it off, walk away, sit outside and enjoy the evening breeze. But, alas, I didn’t.

When all was said and done, I didn’t much care enough for anyone, for the most part they succumbed to the histrionic attack and the self lauding that really makes me wonder if this will once again be an election in which we vote for the lesser of two evils rather than a true shining warrior winner for the people.

Setting aside my own personal views on the issues, which is very hard, I didn’t learn a whole lot about theirs:

I think they all agreed on a solid wall between Mexico and the US as a starting point to curb illegal immigration.

I think most agreed on defunding Planned Parenthood from a Federal level.

Most agreed that the deal with Iran was messy and wimpy.

Syria and Russia were a point of division – no one seemed to know that the US has already engaged Russia to help with ISIS in Syria… so you can’t exactly vilify and sanction Russia for doing your bidding.

China was also a point of division with some naively stating that snubbing the President of China at the White House dinner was a good policy – albeit immature and childish, while others felt isolating China would be good for the US, given that China is our biggest trade partner and holder of T-bills, that would be a fall on your face political and business short sidedness mess!

Vaccines – I don’t believe they should be a political decision.

Raising Minimum Wage – divided. The worst rhetoric on this front was the candidate who stated that he wanted to raise education levels so no one was working minimum wage… Slight problem, who then is performing those jobs? No one? Script!

The resounding debate seemed more of a self-promotion campaign to tell everyone all your successes, ad nauseum. The “I” statements flew with such force, they were good moments to refresh my cup of coffee. And while I do understand that a candidates track record is of value, most people really don’t care, just look at Obama’s track record… he had none, nothing, zilch. When Trump attacked Carly’s track record and her response, he then defended his own failures with similar points thereby substantiating her points. High school debate lesson 101; ‘don’t attack someone’s failure with the same challenge that you failed in’ (pardon the preposition).

The overall attempt was to outshine, to find a stage on which the candidate could perform Othello. And while they all have intellect, who among them has wisdom?

The ‘blow them to bits’ mentality of destroying nations has gone way too far. Throwing Russia and China into the mix of hostility would be suicide. Sanctioning Russia and China is a Socialist move, it eliminates competition and hence raises corruption, fraud and ‘prices’. We don’t have the capacity or ability to eliminate China from our markets. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you!

And while I have been a fan of Carly, she is a spot on orator, she was a bit too Hillaryish last night. Angry. By contrast, Ben Carson and Huckabee didn’t interrupt enough to get air time. Christie was admirable for trying to redirect the animosity away from each other. Trump was Trump. Rand Paul too quiet. Bush too defensive. Kasich elaborated exponentially on self. Rubio was poignant but I don’t care for his politics, Cruz and Walker didn’t offer anything special. I felt I was watching a reality show and began to fantasize that it wasn’t that much different than the portrayal of government in The Hunger Games or some other science fiction flick. But given I don’t watch reality shows, this one had no more appeal to me than any other and I soon flipped the channel to watch Frasier.

Interestingly, even the way in which the media determines winners and losers is remarkably viewed from a perspective of entertainment in evaluating performance rather than substance, in declaring victory for being outspoken without content, in making it a Donald Trump ‘show’, in succumbing to the very childish stance of bullying and victimizing, and in making it a defensive personality show.

I imagine we could have had anyone on stage and they could have performed for the audience – but is that what we need, want and crave? Or do we want someone who is ardently, fervently a defender of our country, of morality, of cohesiveness, and of compassion working in unity to better our economy, our political fraud, our internal government corruption, our budgets and spending fraud, our reputation, someone who truly believes in the words they speak, and we have no doubt will follow to achieve those goals.

Instead we saw our candidates pulled down Alice In Wonderland’s rabbit hole by a media bent on ridiculing the entire party.

Economic Freedom measures living standards, growth, income equality and less corruption. The US has dropped from second place as the most economically free – to 16th! And falling!

We are now behind Chile, Jordon, the United Emirates, and Mauritus (a small island country off Africa). Economic freedom is defined as a laissez faire capitalist market system with minimal government regulation. Socialism is defined as greater government regulation, greater individual control of companies as in cooperatives, higher taxes, non-profit enterprises, and collective sharing. While it has been around in various forms for many centuries, it’s lacking success has shown that it is not an ideal system to aspire toward. Historically, Socialism has gravitated toward communism and the breeding of intense corruption, and a failing economy.

Leon Trotsky, Lenin, Karl Marx, the Jewish Bolsheviks, Charles Kingsley, Rosa Luxemberg, and Charles Fourier have all dabbled in Socialism. There are Socialist political parties in Norway, Sweden, the UK, Africa, Canada, and the US. Advocates push for the creation of a society in which each person is ranked according to his or her capacities and rewarded according to his or her work… Sounds a lot like communist China to me. The government decides what your capabilities are at birth and your entire education is directed toward that final destination. It’s called – absolute control.

And that is the reason it has never worked. You simply can not control an entire population indefinitely, we are a people inherently, instinctively built on freedom. We crave freedom. We fight our wars for freedom. Braveheart! We are willing to die for freedom. Corralling people into a socialist-communist agenda has never worked historically, and will not work today.

Some point to successes; Norway and Canada. But is it working? They have specific social products, like healthcare, that are hailed as great positives promoting socialist success. And while socialized medicine has some benefits, the negatives are ripe too. Fraud, corruption, long wait times – sometimes months and months, doctor shortages, higher taxes, and even the forced euthanasia of people deemed too far gone to benefit from medical care and left to die. A friend of mine told me she was on a six month waiting list to get an MRI for a suspected brain tumor.

Advocates claim we already have a socialized government, consider Social Security… Oh, that’s right, Social Security, the system that is bankrupt and borrowing from other coffers simply to sustain itself. Or our military? Currently failing for its internal corruption and fraud? The Postal Service? Failed. Public Schools? Failed. Jail system? Failed. Veterans Healthcare? Failed. Food Stamps? Failed. IRS? Failed.

Why? Why do socialized systems consistently fail?

Because the theory assumes people will comply in a world without incentive, without reward, without merit, and without voice. Because the theory assumes we will comply much like cattle. Mindless. Which opens the door to a greater medicated society, one in which we comply because we are so medicated we don’t care. Where population growth is a factor of immigration not birthrate of ethnic nationals. And because the theory supports the growth of fraud and corruption within government. Is there fraud and corruption in the private sector? Yes. But they are subject to consequence for that behavior. In the government, the corruption and fraud is tolerated, even encouraged, ie the EPA.

Alberta just this year elected a Socialist leader, Rachel Notley. But, Alberta’s economy is sliding and collapsing. Why? Fires, drought, a devastated agriculture, oil revenues in the toilet, and a budget deficit. Their ministry solution – invest more money in infrastructure and subsidize oil and agriculture losses. With what funds?

Norway’s economy is showing signs of contraction as well as 30% of government revenue is linked to oil. But Norway has been experiencing a dramatic deficiency. Over the last decade or more, it’s ethnic population has been in a spiraling decline. Some point to the need for dual incomes, others point to a lack of desire for children, and others point to infertility issues. At the same time, immigrants now account for upwards of 23% of the population, 69% from Arab countries, 31% from European countries.

Socialism is akin to pyramid marketing, everyone gets rich in the beginning, but as the dispersion of wealth becomes greater and greater, only those at the top of the pyramid survive. It sounds great in theory, but the long term sustainability has proven over and over to be a complete failure. We abhor the communist-socialists of former Russia, North Korea, and China, and yet seem oblivious when Socialism is professed as the solution elsewhere. Why?

Whenever a country’s citizens feel impoverished, they look to other methodologies as the solution. Its similar to Democrat vs Republican rule. Switch. Switch. Switch. Let’s try something new. Socialism? Destroys economies. Destroys nations. And is a precursor to the next new – a New World Order of Globalization, as we look on like sheep for someone, something, to save us from this horror called Socialism.

‘Men emasculated by the Church’ came up in a conversation with my husband and I just listened, somewhat dumbfounded, but then curious.

For years we’ve heard about emasculated men. Self help books abound with the concept. The blame is always on females, feminism, and macho-women. And while a shift did occur in the sixties with Gloria Steinem, she is/was secular, so how could this relate and translate to a Christian man?

Often, most often, men will point out a television commercial or a sitcom in which the man is portrayed as a subservient idiot. This role playing on television is considered the cornerstone of emasculation. But it is hardly a Christian perspective, Hollywood is nearly completely secular. In fact, most deference to the term is from the secular indoctrination that has invaded culture.

Some contend that because the church shames sexual sin, this is a form of emasculation. But is it the church creating the emasculation or the culture of sexual sin? If you are Christian, adultery and porn are not accepted. Period. So if the church calls you out on your sin, it isn’t the church emasculating you, it is your sin that has, and now your guilt and shame need a force to blame – the church. The blame then further sends you into the secular world and the circle is complete – you are fighting Biblical teaching with secular psychology.

I looked it up and interestingly, the topic was quite gainful during 2008 and then seemed to lose its luster. It was more of a book club topic than something real. It was something Hollywood capitalized on, helping to indoctrinate the notion that in order to not be emasculated, men must pursue even greater sin, ‘it is a man’s nature to lust and have women’. Pulled into the Hollywood rhetoric, men use this example to justify their impurity. And thus deny their Christianity. And the more they sin, the more angry they become at the women who are not sinning in this way thus emasculating themselves into a deadly spiral.

But there is more to it. Liberalizing churches has recreated the message. Men say they want to hear more of the warrior messages, more of the clashes and battles, more about holding up the cause and protecting family. When the sermons are relegated to gentleness and nurturing, men say they feel feminized. This becomes further convoluted by the fact that in the Christian church the elders and pastors and leaders are all – men.

Are men feminizing and emasculating themselves?

The Bible certainly does not emasculate. King David comes to mind! A warrior! A savior! A murderer. An adulterer. Masculine and beloved by God, he was also subject to sin. What gave him masculinity was that he confronted the sin, hated the sin, cried out in repentance against the sin and recognized that as a warrior he would not become slave to his sin! He did not sit around and fall prey to shame and guilt, he fought sin like he fought all battles. He didn’t blame Bathsheba. He blamed himself.

Blaming your wife for your emasculation, blaming the church – does not address the battle or repentance, it instead justifies and pushes a man further away from Christianity into secularism.

When reading men’s self-help books and men’s articles about what makes them ‘feel’ emasculated, the typical jargon lists the ten or fifteen things a female imparts: having to borrow his wives/girlfriend’s car, when his ego feels deflated, when the woman brags about past sexual relations, when she doesn’t laud him for his financial wizardry, when she tells him he’s a wimp, etc… Some were really goofy; when she tells him he needs a haircut, sitting in the store while she shops, being beat at a sport or a game, or chiding him for forgetting something. I imagine these guys egocentric heart could ‘list’ a thousand reasons why someone else has caused them this misfortune. But the Truth is, they’ve fallen prey to their own battle.

So what would a non-emasculated church look like?

By even claiming emasculation, men would seem to have fallen victim to the secular word. The Bible is quite clear that God calls for men to act like men and women like women. Ephesians 4 verse 14 says: “That we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes”

John MacArthur goes further in his warning: “You want to be a man as opposed to a little boy? Grow up in your grasp of the truth. Get a grip on sound doctrine and quit being influenced by every new trend and every undulating breeze that blows across the evangelical landscape. Quit chasing the evangelical fads. Get anchored in the truth, and learn to defend it.”

He’s not saying the church is to blame for your feeling emasculated, he doesn’t blame your wife or Gloria Steinem, or your mother or vacant father, he tells each of us to take our own leads, our own ownership, and learn what is right, what is good, from the Biblical Word while not honoring our desire to be a slave to sin or justifying our chemistry, ie testosterone.

MacArthur further chastises John Eldridge as succumbing to a boy’s heart instead of a man’s in Eldridge’s famous quote, “Deep in his heart, every man longs for a battle to fight, an adventure to live, and a beauty to rescue.” Instead, MacArthur advises: “Scripture says what motivates real men is a love for the truth; a contempt for error; and a passion for being used by God in the work of snatching people from the grip of the father of lies.” It is about leading others instead of falling prey to self as the central theme.

MacArthur admonishes, the idea that men need to sit at a bar, smoke cigars and drink beer while discussing theology is no different than a ‘hen house’ of women who substitute tea for beer and crumpets for cigars. If you want to be a manly man, go out into the real world and speak Truth where it is under attack. Be disciplined, knowledgeable and anchored, understanding the Truth well and devoted to it.

Does this mean you can’t love adventure and fishing and crabbing, sailing the sea, and rescuing a damsel in distress? Absolutely not. It simply means you won’t find your masculinity there, you will find it rooted inside you when you have taken the Biblical Truth and made it yours. Amen.

Refugees, they are awarded green cards, food stamps, free healthcare, and welfare. We grant this status to 70,000 automatically each year although Kerry wants to increase that to 100,000. But Kerry isn’t alone, there are a number of prominent Republican Senators who want to increase immigration. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, of the Middle East refugees that have arrived since 2008 over 91% are on food stamps, 73% are on Medicaid , and 68% are on cash welfare.

They come from predominantly Iraq, Burma, Bhutan, Somalia, Cuba, Iran, Congo, Sudan, Eritrea, and Ethiopia. But additional refugees come from Saudi Arabia and Jordan… despite the fact that these countries are our allies. So how can you be a refugee from a country that is not at war? The US now houses 20% of all international migrants, of the 41 million immigrants currently residing in the US, 1.02 million are from the Middle East and North Africa.

By contrast, the Muslim population in Germany is nearing 6 million. And the shift in societal norms is already rooted. Germany has Sharia courts, Sharia law, polygamy (although illegal is accepted as a part of the Muslim rule), and as such the multiple wives are granted single mother status giving them additional welfare funds and rights by German law. And while mainstream media would have us believe that Germany is welcoming with open arms, the Germans tend to disagree with this evaluation and purging of their ideals. Censorship is clouding reality. Anyone who speaks out against the Islamization of Germany is considered a terrorist themselves. A radical. Probed by the Intelligentsia.

The sole reason Germany is accepting so many Muslim immigrants is because population in Germany is shrinking dramatically and laborers are in deep shortage. Why? Values changed and being a mother in Germany was considered a worthless occupation, a non-occupation. Women stopped having children or had just one. Germany’s foreign born population now represents about 12% of the total population. How this will change the political, societal, judicial, and religious values could completely reframe Germany in the short term and decades to come.

How does this stack elsewhere in Europe? In Britain, it is estimated that 50-85% of the Muslim population is on welfare benefits. In addition, 24% of female and 20% of male Muslim immigrants claim disability. It is believed that the unemployed Muslim population costs Britain upwards of 18 billion euro per year.

In Denmark, 40% of the welfare budget is spent on the Muslim population while they make up 5% of the total Danish population. Many sects claim that working in a foreign country goes against Islam as it means supporting or contributing to a system that is non-Muslim.

Rome is a particular target for jihadists and radicals as it houses Vatican City.

Where are the Christian refugees? We certainly don’t hear about the US, Australia or Germany taking in the Yazidi’s or other Christians persecuted and executed in the Middle East. In fact the – 20 – Christian refugees that came to the US were put in jail in San Diego as they awaited their fate. Two towns in France stated they would only take Christian refugees from Syria. But these mayors were chastised for their stance.

This is not about immigrant children escaping gangs, rape and abuse, this is about terrorism. Pictures on news sites, blogs, etc… like to show pictures of young children arm-in-arm, children sweetly smiling, children looking like they stepped out of a modeling catalogue when depicting resettled immigrants. That’s not the story. Most immigrants don’t have papers, they have only their word that they come from Syria or Yemen or Eritrea. If they come for economic relief they are not granted refugee status.

Where do the Muslims typically settle when migrating to the US? Predominantly in New York, LA, Detroit, Chicago, DC/Virginia, San Diego, Boston, Houston, San Francisco and Dallas. Which basically accounts for every major city in the US. Other cities where growth is escalating include; Tampa and Miami, Jackson and Nashville, Minneapolis, Seattle and Portland.

How many terrorists are in the US? How many came via the Trojan Horse of Immigration? Those are numbers that are virtually impossible to know with any absoluteness, but we do know they are here, more are coming, and they have an agenda. Interestingly, if you look up the FBI’s most wanted terrorist list, it overwhelmingly contains people who purportedly committed some criminal offense dating back 30 or 40 years ago. There was no mention of anyone involved in 9-11. And according to the US State Department, The Muslim Brotherhood – is okay – no terrorists there…

How do you solve the importing and radicalization of terrorists? Well, one thing you don’t do is shut your eyes and bury your head and claim it’s all about ‘peace’. Imagine how you might be treated ~

After arrogantly denying any wrong doing for months and months, Hillary has been coached to come clean, with added tears for sympathy. That’s an oxymoron. I can’t imagine Hillary ever having shed a real tear her entire life! Not the type. We’ve gone from complete adamant ‘I have done nothing wrong’ to complete whimpering ‘I take full responsibility for wrong doing’. And it just sits wrong.

Why would she cry? Because she got caught? Because she couldn’t pretend she was innocent? Because she is losing? Or because she hates admitting mistakes and especially hates making an apology because it goes against every fiber every grain of her psyche.

And now, she looks like she is groveling for support. I imagine her camp finally told her that she had no other option and she fought them like the banshee she is until the shadows pulled doorknob from the door and said either she apologizes or her money and backing will be on the other side of the door.

But what is really going on?

Trump and the Clinton’s enjoyed a tense friendship with Hillary attending Trump’s wedding in 2005 and Trump giving upwards of $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation. While rumors are circulating that Trump is actually a plant to discombobulate the Republican voters, the axiom, ‘divide and conquer’ comes to mind.

Trump has changed political parties as often as Hillary changes her hair. From Democrat to Independent to Republican and a host of ‘in-betweens’, his changing ways are a bit unnerving. If he were actually, gasp, elected, would he become a Democrat while in office? The most telling would be finding a connection between Soros and Trump. It’s hardly a secret that Soros has crossed party lines before, McCain is one example.

The media points to a party hosted by Nouriel Roubini in 2009 which was attended by George Soros, Trump, and Oliver Stone. Coincidentally, it was 2009 that Trump changed his party status from Democrat to Republican. Soros invested $160 million in Trump’s Chicago skyscraper which was completed in 2009. In 2009, Trump Entertainment Resorts filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The largest holder of Trump’s debt was Avenue Capital Group. At the time, Chelsea Clinton worked for the firm – 2006 to 2009. Marc Lasry, one of the co-founders of Avenue Capital is a strident backer of Hillary. In 2013, Lasry stepped down from Avenue Capital after Bill Clinton pushed Obama to name him as the new US Ambassador to France. Unfortunately, Lasry had to ultimately decline when he was found to be ‘involved’ in a money laundering international poker ring. Trumps daughter married orthodox Jewish businessman, Jared Kushner, in 2009. Trump adamantly claims no ties with – anyone. But sometimes, one protests too much, and we find the truth is far different.

Sabotaging the Republican party by creating a monstrous view of values and visions could help sway people to vote for the democrat candidate simply out of fear. If Republicans voted for Hillary in order to avoid voting for Trump, Hillary would have succeeded at something never before attempted. Faith in Republicans would virtually collapse, and the perfect staged play would bow in reverence.

So while Hillary is groveling and Trump is loudly lauding himself, Soros is laughing and the country is cringing.